↓ Skip to main content

Single-Injection Versus Multiple-Injection Technique of Ultrasound-Guided Paravertebral Blocks

Overview of attention for article published in Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
30 X users
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Single-Injection Versus Multiple-Injection Technique of Ultrasound-Guided Paravertebral Blocks
Published in
Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, January 2017
DOI 10.1097/aap.0000000000000631
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate the extent of dermatomal spread following an ultrasound-guided thoracic paravertebral block (PVB) when equal volumes of local anesthetic are injected at 1 versus 5 vertebral levels. Seventy patients undergoing a unilateral mastectomy were randomized to receive either single or multiple injections of a PVB under real-time ultrasound guidance using a parasagittal approach. The patients in the single-injection group received a PVB at T3-T4 level with 25 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine and 4 subcutaneous sham injections. Patients in the multiple-injection group received 5 injections of a PVB from T1 to T5 level. Five milliliters of 0.5% ropivacaine was injected at each level. Evaluation of the sensory block was carried out 20 minutes following the completion of the PVB. The median (interquartile range) dermatomal spread was not significantly different for the single-injection group (5 [4-6]) compared with the multiple-injection group (5 [5-6]), with a median difference of 0 segments (95% confidence interval, -1 to 0 segments; P = 0.22). The median time to performance of the single-injection PVB was shorter compared with the multiple-injection group (10 minutes), with a mean difference of -4 minutes (95% confidence interval, -6 to -3 minutes; P < 0.001). An ultrasound-guided single-injection PVB provides equivalent dermatomal spread and duration of analgesia compared with a multiple-injection PVB. The single-injection technique takes less time to perform and hence may be preferred over a multiple-injection technique.The trial was registered prospectively at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02852421) on July 15, 2016.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Master 4 6%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 25 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 41%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 30 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 February 2023.
All research outputs
#2,382,170
of 34,457,357 outputs
Outputs from Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine
#285
of 3,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,043
of 463,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine
#15
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,457,357 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 463,013 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.